On Apr 3, 2014, at 11:13 AM, Rich Megginson <rmeggins@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On 04/03/2014 08:53 AM, Michael Gettes wrote: >> Hi all, >> >> I recognize 389 is a community project and asking for timelines can be problematic. Right now, I am sorta stuck between a rock and a hard place. In production, I am on 1.2.11.15 which has problems that are fixed by 1.2.11.28. I have 1.2.11.28 in test and fixes all my prod problems but introduces a new problem which makes it rather difficult to manage the environment and it would appear this will be corrected in 1.2.11.29. > > What is the new problem? The new problem is what I reported in 47758 which crashes my master servers using the console. the ticket got closed out as a duplicate as you guys understand the problem and it would appear it will be corrected in .29. > Note that for EL6, you should really use the version provided by the OS. The "epel6" packages are really for "bleeding edge" testing of new features/patches. However, if there is some feature in the "epel6" packages that you require, that is not in the OS packages, then I guess you'll just have to keep using the "epel6" packages indefinitely. ok. > >> So, I am a little curious as to when we might see 29. I do see on the roadmap 29 has 4 closed and 5 active but no date set. >> >> I’m wondering if anyone would want to out on a limb and guesstimate - are we thinking days or a couple of weeks or several weeks or any estimate would be so appreciated. No, I will not hold anyone to anything - I can’t. I’m just trying to gauge things for internal planning estimates recognizing I have no control over this process. (yeah, i know, so why bother? cuz, i have to try). >> >> Lastly, although I am on RHEL6 and have RHEL support, I don’t have RHEL DS support. I find the 389 community generally excellent. I have been trying to keep to what’s available in the repo but, as it would appear, I am now going to have to go with what’s available by source. > > I'm not sure what you mean by "what's available in the repo" vs. "what's available by source”. ya know, i am not really sure either. but you’re response reinforces in my mind that something weird is going on here and i have to have a chat with my sysadmins as to why i am not seeing what i should be seeing in the EPEL repos - we have firewall stuff means I am not in full control of how i get stuff. OR, i just go with source for 29 when it comes out and wait for the OS dist to catch up. That might be the path of least resistance, but i think i still need to resolve my EPEL issues with my sysadmins. > >> So, if I go with the source route for maintenance… should I move from the 1.2.11 line to 1.3.1? I am not sure I fully appreciate the differences. > > In general, I would suggest don't upgrade to a new major version unless you absolutely need to. so with this advice, i am reading i should stay on the 1.2.11 line and fix my EPEL issues. THANK YOU! /mrg -- 389 users mailing list 389-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/389-users
